Thread by @tjayaraman

UNEP EMISSIONS GAP REPORT (EGR) -- Propaganda piece for the net-zero "tamasha" (for non-Indians, Oxford Languages defn: "a fuss or a commotion") - Abandoning equity.
@3rdworldnetwork @AGNChairUNFCCC @n_thanki @bforboseman @byadavbjp @moefcc @TheBTI @TedNordhaus @KanitkarT
1/n

Report acknowledges clearly that cumulative emissions on the way to net zero determines warming as in figure in Chapter 3 ..........newclimate.org/2021/10/26/emi…
2/n

In words again: "Global net-zero emissions targets in isolation set only a weak limit on the maximum level of global warming (Rogelj et al.2015), as the maximum level of warming is largely defined by the cumulative amount of CO2 emissions emitted until net zero (IPCC 2018)."
3/n

But having said this in the content: why call the chapter "Net zero emissions targets" and title the section as "Science of net zero"!! Why?? Again in section 3.2.3, it is titled, "Pathway to net zero counts"!! The same issue returns.
4/n

Entire chapter could be re-written with "carbon budget" replacing "net zero" in the chapter heading and in every section and sub-section, with minor rewriting of the text. Would have been an honest piece of science.
5/n

What we see in the EGR now is correct science, twisted to a prejudiced purpose!! An honest approach would have given not the figure above, but this one (thanks to @KanitkarT ). The same warming, the same carbon budget, but different net zero.
6/n

The other cover-up in the EGR. Not having any criteria of fairness. So linear reduction to net-zero becomes a default of some kind. But linear reduction for the Annex I is blatantly a carbon budget grab!!
7/n

The other blatant move in EGR - elevating "least cost pathways" as the standard of what national commitments should be. Assessment of impact, made by comparison to results of Climate Action Tracker (CAT)!!
8/n

Not surprising, since it is Climate Action Tracker authors who are part of writing the EGR!! Table 3.2 seems to list other studies, but that is fake. Only quantitative study in list is CAT.
9/n

No reference to equity based pathways. Unsurprising since the scenario scientists simply don't have time for equity....Figure 3.3 tells you many things, but not the crucial info -- the cumulative emissions on the way to net zero!! Nor of course of past cumulative emissions
10/n

The one crucial info, as they have clearly acknowledged but no numbers!! So they present linear reduction as some kind of "fair" by default!! All in the game, on the eve of COP26, as the UK presidency desperately pushes its agenda!!
11/n

@threadreaderapp unroll